HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 12-11-2012 APPROVED 3/19/2013
MINUTES
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR MEETING
December 11, 2012
7:00 p.m.
The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday,
December 11, 2012 at 7:00 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, NC.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Jacobs and Commissioners Mark Dorosin,
Alice M. Gordon, Barry Jacobs, Earl McKee, Renee Price, and Penny Rich
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Bernadette Pelissier
COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Frank Clifton, Assistant County Managers
Gwen Harvey, Michael Talbert, Clarence Grier and Clerk to the Board Donna Baker (All other
staff members will be identified appropriately below)
NOTE: ALL DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN THESE MINUTES ARE IN THE PERMANENT
AGENDA FILE IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE.
1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
Chair Jacobs recognized Michael Talbert who introduced the Orange County
Emergency Services Director Mr. Jim Groves, who will be joining Orange County in January.
He comes from an international consulting firm in emergency management.
Jim Groves said that he was looking forward to serving Orange County residents.
Frank Clifton presented Assistant County Manager Gwen Harvey with roses and
recognized her because this is her last meeting. Gwen Harvey is retiring at the end of
December after 10 years with Orange County. He said that she is very passionate about her
work to Orange County and to the citizens of Orange County.
Assistant County Manager Gwen Harvey said thank you to all that she has worked with.
Commissioner McKee arrived at 7:04 PM.
Chair Jacobs thanked Gwen Harvey for her service.
PUBLIC CHARGE
The Chair dispensed with the reading of the public charge.
2. Public Comments
a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
Don O'Leary said at the last meeting, it was nice to see the other side of the
Commissioners at the reception and the administration of oaths. He said that if Orange
County continues down the current path of ICLEI and Agenda 21, it is putting future
generations in jeopardy. He said that this is illegally throwing the citizens of Orange County
under the bus.
Robin Jacobs, Executive Director of the Eno River Association, said that the
association is appreciative of Orange County's efforts to preserve the environment. She
presented the 2013 Eno River Association calendars to the Board of County Commissioners.
Chair Jacobs said that at their places is a yellow sheet that goes with item 7-b, Support
for Hillsborough to Clayton Segment of the NC Mountains-to-Sea Trail.
b. Matters on the Printed Agenda
(These matters were considered when the Board addressed that item on the agenda
below.)
3. Petitions by Board Members (Three Minute Limit Per Commissioner)
Commissioner Gordon said that in December 2011 the Board of County
Commissioners adopted the Road Naming and Addressing Ordinance in an effort to expedite
the delivery of emergency services. Her petition is for the Tax Administration to provide a
report on the status of the addressing ordinance, including at least the following items:
1) Give a summary of the work done and the progress made during 2012;
2) Describe the plan and timing for the implementation in 2013;
3) Describe what residents should do now to comply with the ordinance.
Commissioner Gordon said that she consulted with the Tax Administrator and he said
that he could present a report on this in February 2013. She asked that this report be
presented at that time.
Commissioner Price said that about a year ago when the Board of County
Commissioners was going through streamlining of the boards and commissions, the
Commission for Women was sunset. She would like to revisit this and possibly bring this
commission back.
4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations
NONE
5. Consent Agenda
• Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda
None
• Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda
A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Price to
approve those items on the consent agenda as stated below:
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Commissioner Dorosin said that it might be useful for the audience if the consent
agenda was displayed on the screens.
Chair Jacobs said that this is now a petition.
a. Minutes
The Board approved the minutes from October 11, 2012 as submitted by the Clerk to the
Board.
b. Motor Vehicle Property Tax Releases/Refunds
The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release motor
vehicle property tax values for twenty-three (23) taxpayer requests that will result in a
reduction of revenue in accordance with NCGS.
c. Personal Property Tax Releases/Refunds
The Board approved a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to change property
tax values for one hundred seventy-three (173) tax notices, which will create property tax
releases and/or refunds that will result in a reduction of revenue, in accordance with North
Carolina General Statute 105-325(a)(4).
d. Property Tax Releases/Refunds
The Board approved a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release property
tax values for thirteen (13) taxpayer requests that will result in a reduction of revenue, in
accordance with North Carolina General Statute 105-381.
e. Applications for Property Tax Exemption/Exclusion
The Board approved a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, related to nine (9)
untimely applications for exemption/exclusion from ad valorem taxation for the 2012 tax
year.
f. Fiscal Year 2012-13 Budget Amendment#5
The Board approved budget and grant project ordinance amendments for fiscal year 2012-
13 for Emergency Services; Department of Environment, Agriculture, and Parks and
Recreation; and Department of Social Services.
g_ Application for North Carolina Lottery Proceeds for Chapel Hill — Carrboro City
Schools (CHCCS) and Contingent Approval of Budget Amendment#5-A Related to
CHCCS Capital Project Ordinances
The Board approved and authorized the Chair to sign an application to the North Carolina
Department of Public Instruction (NCDPI) to release funds from the NC Education Lottery
account related to FY 2012-13 debt service payments for Chapel Hill — Carrboro City
Schools, and approved Budget Amendment#5-A (amended School Capital Project
Ordinances) contingent on the State's approval of the application and authorized the Chair
to sign.
h. Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Ordinance Amendment
Outline/Schedule for UDO Text Amendments to Revise Requirements Related to
Schools Adequate Public Facilities
The Board approved the process components and schedule for text amendments to the
Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) text, currently scheduled for the February 25, 2013
Quarterly Public Hearing.
i. Impact Fee Reimbursement Request
The Board approved an impact fee reimbursement request from Habitat for Humanity of
Orange County, NC, Inc. for $104,720 for eleven (11) homes recently constructed in the
County.
L Purchase of One (1) Ambulance from Excellance, Incorporated
The Board approved and authorized Emergency Services and Financial Services staff to
proceed with the immediate plan to purchase one (1) ambulance from Excellance, Inc. and
execute the appropriate paperwork.
k. Interlocal Agreement with the City of Durham for Waste Transfer Station Use
The Board approved the Interlocal Agreement with the City of Durham for authorization to
use the Durham Waste Transfer Station for a period of five years and authorized the
Manager to sign.
I. Implementation Strategy from the Emergency Services Workgroup of
Recommendations from the Comprehensive Assessment of Emergency Medical
Services & 911/Communications Center Operations Study
The Board approved proceeding with establishing and hiring for the four new Paramedic
Level Shift Supervisor positions; instructed staff to bring back at an upcoming meeting a
budget amendment for $267,500 in the current fiscal year; and incorporated the other
remaining recommendations into the Budget and CIP process for Fiscal Year 2013-14.
6. Public Hearings
a. Public Transit Implementation Resolutions
The Board conducted a public hearing on, and considered approval of, resolutions
authorizing Triangle Transit Authority ("TTA") to levy a '/2-cent transit tax in Orange County,
authorizing Orange County to levy a $7 vehicle registration tax in Orange County, and an
additional $3 vehicle TTA registration tax in Orange County and authorizing the Chair to sign.
Chair Jacobs read the above statement.
John Roberts said that many meetings have been spent discussing transit and these
are the next steps in the process, for Durham County and Orange County to request that TTA
levy the '/2-cent sales tax and the additional vehicle registration fee and tax.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Dave Laodicina thanked the County Commissioners for pursuing this transit plan. He
said that this is a start, but there are many pieces to it. He said that urban centers will be built
where people live and work and will be built around the transit stations. He is ready for this
plan to get started.
Bonnie Hauser spoke for Smart Transit for Orange County, which is a group of Town
and County citizens. She said that they support transit but they do have questions about the
plan. She said that Orange County plans to spend $660 million over the next 23 years; 70% of
which, about $500 million, will go to light rail service. The plan relies on federal and state
grants. According to the plan, Orange County will add 34,000 bus hours in the first four years,
about 18% to a base of 203,000 hours. By contrast, Durham will add 50,000 in the first three
years, about 28%. Wake County, who has not yet endorsed the plan, will double its bus
hours if it chooses to opt in. Charlotte spent 10 years building bus service in preparation for
light rail. She said that frequent, convenient bus service is essential to build transit ridership.
She showed a spreadsheet from the transit plan appendices that show how transit dollars will
be spent between now and 2020. She said that from the start, the bulk of the funds will go to
Light Rail Transit and not bus service as has been represented to the public.
In addition to the sales tax, the Board will consider a $10 vehicle registration fee, a 30%
increase to the $33 fee; 50% if you count the $5 that TTA has already levied. No other
county, including Durham or Charlotte, has levied the transit fee. She said that once the
County levies the tax or fee, it authorizes TTA to move forward. Changes are governed by the
implementation agreement, which requires approval by TTA, the MPO, and the Board of
County Commissioners to make any changes. She asked the Board to please consider what
happens to the ability to negotiate on behalf of Orange County once it levies the taxes and
fees.
Del Snow read a prepared statement:
"I'm Del Snow and I'm the chair the Chapel Hill Planning Board. I am proud that our
board is decidedly pro-transit, and although we are pleased that the voters have shown their
support for a '/2 cent sales tax, we have informed the Town Council that we do not support the
MPO 2040 transportation plan that the TTA plan is based on. Our unanimous decision was
based on many factors. Because of time constraints, I will share only some of them with you
tonight.
The Planning Board is encouraging the use of responsible data-based decision
practices. In view of that, we have serious questions about the plan's population projections.
Although a specific critical mass is needed to support transit, no data was presented proving
that Chapel Hill could successfully absorb the quantity of housing and commercial building
necessary for the type of transit proposed. A significant drawback to the plan is that it does not
support many of the Future Focus areas established by the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. These
areas, restricted to transit corridors, will most likely accommodate much of the projected growth
for Chapel Hill. The small area plans that will be produced are expected to create density
downtown, the length of MLK, Jr. Blvd, along 15-501 south and north near Ephesus Church
Road. The Board believes that it is the Comprehensive Plan that should drive growth and
development, and that a transit plan should be used to support that vision. We also noted the
plan's shortcomings in serving the decentralizing hospital system, two Durham Tech
Campuses and the county's two economic development zones. Light rail's very narrow area of
impact provides the least flexibility in response to our changing growth patterns.
It is the Planning Board's opinion that flexible, frequent and more extensive bus
service, along with safe bike lanes and sidewalks, would better meet the needs of commuters
and transit users, and at a lower cost per rider. The Planning Board is particularly concerned
that the transit plan offers minimal improvement in travel times, which to us, is essential in
order to encourage ridership and benefit the taxpayers who are funding it. Our consensus was
that given the percentage of trips that will still occur by car, the low percentage of transit
ridership, and the level of congestion remaining, we have not met the goals of a
comprehensive transit plan, and will not achieve our transportation or environmental
objectives.
As you know, based partly on our input, the town council has created a new
transportation workgroup —which could be an asset to the county if you opt to delay the tax
and work to correct the deficiencies in the transit plan. You have my commitment to provide a
rapid response on issues brought to the Chapel Hill planning board.
The Planning Board will continue to encourage the Council to align transportation
improvements with the future focus areas and to consider the dynamics of a more 21 st century
plan by incorporating forward-looking demographics such as population aging, new home-
workplace trends, on-line education opportunities, environmental protection and serving the
broadest range of the County residents.
You are making a pivotal decision that will impact all of the County for a long time. As
the chair of the CH Planning Board, I know that we all want to make the most responsible and
supportive decision for Orange County. Because the County will lose important negotiating
leverage if you approve the tax tonight, I ask that you Ip ease consider a delay so that you can
make sure that the transit plan is truly aligned to the priorities of the towns, the county and
UNC.
Linda Haac serves on Carrboro's Transportation Advisory Board. She said that she is
speaking about the comments from her board on the 2040 Transportation Plan. She said that
the plan needs to be fiscally constrained. She said that one thing that surprised her board was
that the road miles did not change much with the inclusion of light rail. There was also great
concern about the model used. It appeared to not explore different scenarios. She said that
another board member expressed that transit investment should be paired with transportation
demand management. There was also concern that the plan did not account for greenhouse
emissions. She asked the Board to think about these things before making a decision.
Sam Gharbo lives in Efland. He said that he is glad that Orange County is increasing
its infrastructure. He said that the plan has a backbone with no real extending ribs to support
it. The plan should reach into the rural areas of Orange County because this would be a
catalyst for growth. He said that it would be great to be able to get on a bus in Efland and get
to places in a reasonable amount of time.
Tish Galu read a prepared statement:
"I am Tish Galu. I am speaking tonight on my experience with many who use or would
like to use the bus system for transportation. I was on the Orange County Partnership to End
Homelessness for two years and in that time helped to begin Support Circles for the
Homeless. While researching this program I spoke to individuals in residential facilities and in
the shelters. In addition, I have been part of a ministry that has helped to provide furniture to
over 70 individuals/families transitioning out of these facilities into rental housing. Most in this
transition phase have jobs —jobs that barely support them. But almost all do not own cars as
they cannot afford the cost of the car, the upkeep, the insurance, or the licensing. These are
the individuals that need public transportation to get to their jobs and do their shopping. I know
and have worked with these families that are currently taking buses to their work— but for
some — a 15-20 minute car ride takes 2 hours or more to get to work and three bus changes.
And because these individuals work on Sundays —there is no bus service at all. Some have
relied on taxi service —which can cost most of their salary for that day! Or they lose the
opportunity to work on the weekend. And the same thing happens when bus service is
reduced when school is out. Since 60% of the cost of the bus service is currently supported by
UNC, they have tailored the service to students. But when the students are not in school, it
does not mean that the workers are not there! The workers are the forgotten entity in this
agreement. The hospital is still open 7 days week and UNC staffs are still working when
students are not there. In addition the hospital and school is expanding their clinics and
campus outside Chapel Hill. And workers in our community need the transportation to get to
their work that may not be at UNC. That said, we are very pleased that the plan now includes
some service on Sundays and when school is not in session, but it does not go nearly far
enough to meet the needs of the residents of our community. The current setup of lines needs
to be expanded so residents can access the bus lines to go work, shopping, or the library more
easily. When it takes two or three bus changes and an hour or more just to go shopping at the
grocery store —you're not likely to choose this route. What it does is deter you from using the
bus because of the way the lines are currently set up. The "hub" is currently the hospital/UNC.
We need to determine where there should be more "hubs" in the community and start to
realign the plan to meet the needs of those that can and want to utilize the bus lines. And of
course align them with Durham's and other bus lines to have an integrated plan.
The transit plan needs to be evaluated to assist those who need transportation to work,
to shop and to live in Orange County. This is your opportunity to look at funding significantly
increased service for increased use by our residents not just the students, to reevaluate the
plan to meet the needs of the entire community. Now is the time for better research, better
planning and better allocation of the money for this project to truly meet the needs of our
community.
Jeanne Brown read a prepared statement.
"I am a resident of southern Chapel Hill and, as a visually impaired individual who is
unable to drive, I am a transit supporter. During the past year I was a regular participant in the
Chapel Hill 2020 "Getting Around" group which focused on transportation issues. As a group,
including our staff liaisons, we agreed that Chapel Hill Transit does a good job of serving the
UNC/UNC healthcare downtown campus but did not feel that it does a good job serving the
broader community.
By way of example, I often talk to people about the benefit to our town of having the
bus system provide service to University Mall or the intersection near Estes and Franklin.
From those locations, riders can access Harris Teeter Grocery store, Walgreen pharmacy, the
library, post office, banking, doctor's offices, and more. But to get to those locations from all
but a couple of Chapel Hill's neighborhoods requires using multiple buses, a significant amount
of walking and, quite frankly, a lot of time.
For instance, for those living IN Southern Village, a mid-day trip to the library at 100
Library Drive using Chapel Hill Transit would take 2 hours and 5 minutes and involve taking 2
buses and walking 1.3 miles. Alternatively, the travel time can be reduced by using both TTA
and Chapel Hill Transit buses, walking 1.65 miles and paying a $2.00 fare.
From Meadowmont, a mid-day trip to the library takes a minimum of 1 hour and 10
minutes and involves 2 buses with 3 different walking legs. Two hours from Southern Village
and an hour and ten minutes from Meadowmont— and those are only one way. Factoring in a
round trip, then a one hour visit to the library for a meeting or to check out books turns into a 2
to 4 hour trip — assuming the buses are running on time. Ladies and gentlemen, this is not a
transit system that serves those without cars or who cannot drive. Nor is it a transit system
that will get people out of their cars. And, as we look to the future, it is not a transit system that
is aligned with our land use plans and economic goals because it does not efficiently or
effectively serve Carolina North, new UNC healthcare sites or new retail and office at Ephesus
Church Road. Tonight I ask that you ensure that your decisions tonight and in the future
protect our existing bus service and provide for expansion of that service in ways that serve
our community.
You can do this in many ways:
1. Given that federal New Starts funding is several years away, explore whether it is
possible to redirect some of the early sales tax dollars towards our local bus systems as
a means for replacing buses or taking care of other much-needed transit projects.
Given the fact that funding for new buses is 80% federal, 10% state and 10% local,
redirecting the initial $3.3 million dollars in this first year could translate into $30million
in new buses or equipment!
2. Make certain that overruns in TTA's Light Rail project, should it be approved, do not
take away from funding for local bus services.
3. Make certain that, should the county collect excess transit sales taxes in the future that
those funds are reallocated to local transit projects.
4. If federal funding for this project is not approved, I'd like to know your exit strategy.
Thank you."
Dave Carter read a prepared statement:
Vehicle Tax is Unfair and Premature
"I'm Dave Carter and have spent a lot of time talking to our citizens over the last year.
It is my impression that our citizens not only do not understand the transit plan - but they are
unaware of the fee or what it will be used for.
Today, nearly every county in North Carolina - including Charlotte, charges residents
$28 to register a car. Randolph County charges $29. Since Triangle Transit has already
added $5 to the fee, Orange, Durham and Wake residents pay $33. Tonight you are
considering adding $10 - that's a total increase of 50%.
Over 23 years, the fee produces $22 million - or about 3% of the transit's $600 million
in funds.
The vehicle fee is a small portion of the funds and places an inappropriate burden on
many residents who will not be served by transit and who rely on the cars to get to work or
transport their families. Rural residents who tend to have more vehicles per household will
incur the greatest burden with the least benefit. Rural attitudes were reflected in their
overwhelming opposition to the plan.
Tonight - on behalf of the growing number of citizens who want good transit, I ask that
you do not levy the vehicle fee. There are too many important issues that need to be worked
out. It's possible that Orange County can achieve many of its transit goals without ever adding
a vehicle fee.
As you now know, Durham has levied their sales tax, but not the vehicle fee. They feel
that it's important to have an interlocal agreement in place with the Durham city bus service
provider to assure that they will use the funds to advance transit goals. Orange County has no
similar agreement with Chapel Hill Transit, UNC or Orange Public Transit.
Durham County also wants to first to educate the public on the transit plan and how the
fees will be used. In doing so, Durham will have the opportunity to feature a park n ride in
Rougement and regional bus service to Wake County for their rural residents - a great time
and money saver - because these residents will no longer have to go through the city of
Durham or pay to park in the Capitol City. In contrast, Orange County is asking rural
residents to pay fees to fund Chapel Hill's free bus service. It's simply not fair.
Please wait to levy the vehicle until you've had a chance to educate the public, work out
the agreements with the bus service providers, and correct the rural/urban inequity built into
the funds."
Damian Seils encouraged the Board to adopt the three resolutions and said that the
Board already adopted the transit plan. He said that the transit plan describes both how transit
investments will be used and the funding sources. He said that the Board has adopted this
and the voters approved the levy of the '/2-cent sales tax.
Tony Blake said that he doubted that many residents are opposed to transit but they
are opposed to how the monies are being spent. He asked what would happen if the tax is not
matched by the government. He asked why Chapel Hill was advocating a transit program —
TTA - that is less successful than Chapel Hill Transit. He said that this was not a transit plan
but a transit trophy. He said that the people that need the services most are unlikely to benefit
from this plan. He said that Eno and Buckhorn economic development districts should be
included in this discussion.
Wib Gulley said that he is here to answer questions along with other staff from Triangle
Transit.
EMAILS —PUBLIC COMMENT
From: Troy Rountree
Phone Number: 9196070109
Message:
Come on guys don't make all your citizens pay for something used by a small percentage.
There has to be a better way! This kind of thing is why our county cannot come together on
anything. Rethink this, do we really need to tax the citizens that have no use for this and make
it free for the ones that do???
From: Robin Lackey
Phone Number:
Message:
Hi, I just wanted to voice my concern on the taxes that will be discussed tonight. For one thing
the taxes are totally unfair all the way around. I and many neighbors do not have any use of
the transit system, so why should we have to pay for it? It does not benefit anyone in the rural
areas. To me this is just another way of giving some and not all a "free ride". I as a farmer, am
taxed to death as it is. I pay this county over $4000.00 in taxes now and that's just property
taxes. Seeing as how I own several tagged vehicle's, I'll also be paying more too. I hope you all
see fit to vote all these taxes down for now. "Working" people have a hard enough time
making ends meet now. If these taxes pass, you all are doing nothing but enabling
"entitlement".
From: Carol Carden
Phone Number: 9197328018
Message:
You all plan to vote on some new vehicle tag fees this evening and this citizen would like to
say I am VERY much against these fees! Why is it that the citizens of rural Orange County
have to continually support the needs of Chapel Hill???!!! The vehicle tag fees that you will be
considering tonight benefit only those in Chapel Hill and do nothing for the rural citizens!
I've worked in Chapel Hill for 25 years now and very rarely take advantage of the transit
system in this town. If Chapel Hill needs money for the Transit System they need to go back to
selling bus passes like they did years ago. The transit system is basically for the students
anyway, so have them buy bus passes to use the transit.
Rural citizens can NOT afford to bear another burden of Chapel Hill and the greedy
commissioners from Chapel Hill. It saddens me to see our county overrun by folks who weren't
even born here! Native citizens to this county are now the minority but yet we are asked to
support those who MOVED here from other states. I wish you all would go back to where you
came from!
Sincerely,
Carol Carden
From: Renee Parker
Phone Number:
Message:
Dear Commissioners,
Please consider what you may or may not impose on the people in this county with the
proposed vehicle tag fees or tax increase. Is it really fair to tax the whole county and only part
of it will benefit (Chapel Hill)? I live in rural Northern Orange Co. I do not have access to
busses or transportation for me to make my deliveries to the other end of the county from my
farm. How will this increase benefit me or my neighbors? Please do not impose more cost to
the residents of this county.
From: Rachel Hawkins
Phone Number: 919-732-9820
Message:
It is with regret that I must say that I can see no benefit to the Northern Orange County
residents (past Hillsborough city limits that the transit system will accommodate so very few
that I really do not believe we should levy that tax.
If the people in Chapel Hill and town of Hillsborough want transit - they should be the ones
levied. As for the other remaining population in Orange County - they are struggling to pay
health increases, tax increases, food increases, housing increases, gas increases, upcoming
electric bill increases, etc. To add more taxes and more taxes is NOT the solution and it would
NOT benefit MOST of the citizens of Orange County. I see EMPTY buses WAITING for riders
every day, and they make their run religiously. People are not taking advantage of this service
NOW, so what would be the difference. I know the economics are felt in 20 years, but right
now - I would like to suggest you HOLD off...on the NEW Vehicle TAXES and the Transit Tax
leverage. Thank you.
From: Jason Baker
Sent: Dec 10, 2012 12:33 PM
Subject: Please vote to levy funds for our transit future
Dear Chairman Jacobs and members of the County Commission,
I am unable to attend Tuesday's hearing on taking the next steps in the implementation of the
transit plan, but want to ask you to move swiftly to allow the collection of desperately-needed
money for our transit future. Let's start collecting these funds as soon as possible.
I have heard that you may have been lobbied by a small but vocal segment of the community,
who opposed the transit plan in the first place, to delay you implementation of the transit
revenue streams. I implore you to recognize this for what it is, a mere stalling tactic, and to
move with haste to implement the will of the voters.
The transit plan is a huge investment, for sure, but a crucial one. Every extra day delayed
in implementing the plan sets us back. The time for action is now. Yes, there will be hiccups
along the way, but the plan which you have helped to build is solid, and now has the proven
support of the voters. The pressures of climate change, social inequity, and economic woes
won't cease building if the plan is delayed, but our ability to combat them will undoubtedly
suffer if we don't begin to set aside money immediately. I have faith, as you should, in your
own ability to work through any issues which may arise, in consultation with your staff and the
steadfast help of our local and regional partners. You have far more options for control of our
transit infrastructure with money in hand than without.
Please move us forward tomorrow night. Thank you.
Jason Baker
PO Box 14
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
(919) 442-8278
A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner McKee to
close the public hearing.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Commissioner McKee said that he has for the past year ranted and raved about the
transit plan and he continues to oppose this plan. He does not feel like the light rail
component is suitable for the present tax base. He said that Orange County does not need
this light rail, but the bus system needs to be fleshed out more into the rural areas of the
County.
Commissioner Price asked about recommendations `a' and `b' and which one is
preferable.
Frank Clifton said that recommendation `B' would be the preferred option.
Commissioner Gordon said that if the Board approves recommendation `B', then the
agreement should be no longer than four years and then it should be reviewed.
Commissioner Rich said that there is something that states there will be a review of the
allocation formula yearly. She asked what allocation this includes.
Frank Clifton said that the agreement on the $7 fee is based on the existing funds for
transit. The distribution formula itself will be reviewed annually.
Commissioner Gordon said that she acknowledged what has been said tonight and that
there were arguments on both sides. She said that in their comments about the plan people
made important points. She said that the situation is that Orange County has signed the Bus
and Rail Investment Plan and approved it, and it has approved the Implementation Agreement
and the Cost-Sharing Agreement. The other part of this relates to levying the fee now or
waiting until next year.
Wib Gulley said that the funds raised in Orange County are from four different funds
going into the plan and he listed these:
- '/2-cent sales tax
- $7 vehicle fee
- $3 increase in the regional vehicle registration fee
- rental cars that are attributed to Orange County
Wib Gulley said that the $7 comes to the County by statute is required to be spent on
transportation. He said that the control is within the plan that has been adopted. He said that
the question is really administration of the fees.
Commissioner Gordon said that there is a way to change the agreements. She said
that there are three entities that have to agree to change the agreements: Orange County
Board of County Commissioners, Triangle Transit, and the DCHC MPO TAC.
A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Rich
to choose Option B:
Orange County creates an agreement with the NCDMV for direct disbursement of
revenues to TTA with similar reporting as noted above each November, and that this
agreement be for a period not longer than four years. The period of time would be coordinated
with the four-year review specified in the Implementation Agreement.
Commissioner Gordon asked Frank Clifton if it would be best to specify the timing.
Frank Clifton said that he would need to work with NCDMV and staff can work this in.
Commissioner McKee said that if the Board passes this motion they would be making
the same mistake they have been doing for years and getting the priorities out of order. He
said that Orange County did not coordinate with the Towns regarding the plans for transit
before approving the Implementation Agreement. He said that the County did not work in
concert with the Towns. Also, the County approved the $7 vehicle registration fee that has not
been levied.
Commissioner Gordon said that it is appropriate to consider recommendations to
approve the three attached resolutions.
Chair Jacobs said that the abstract is confusing and it does not lay the order of actions
that Commissioner McKee is advocating.
Commissioner Dorosin said that it was not clear that Commissioner Gordon was making
a motion to levy the fee. He echoed what Commissioner Gordon said about the agreements
and negotiations that had been made and the vibrant discussion of the community. He said
that it would represent bad faith if the Board now backtracked. He said that Orange County
would get into a bad place as a community if they only want to pay taxes for services that they
do not need. He said that a lot of people pay school taxes and they do not have children. He
said that he is in favor of approving the resolutions.
Commissioner Price said that she is leaning toward Commissioner McKee's concerns.
She said that the vehicle registration fee is a burden to some people. She said that there
needs to be more robust bus service. She said that it is a lot of money to put into light rail at
this time.
Commissioner Rich said that she was on the Chapel Hill Town Council and they spoke
about this plan in depth. She said that it is her understanding that the first monies that come in
will go to bus transit. Wib Gulley verified this.
Commissioner Rich asked how quickly the funds will be coming in and Wib Gulley said
that it would be as soon as summer or early fall.
Commissioner Rich said that she is strongly in favor of this and she is excited to vote
for this.
Commissioner Price said that the rural areas of the County are not getting the bus
service that they deserve. She is really concerned that most of the funds are going to Chapel
Hill. She would like to see more because Hillsborough and Efland have grown. There needs
to be a more comprehensive bus service in this area.
Chair Jacobs said that Chair Pelissier could not be here tonight but she has been
supportive of this plan throughout. He made reference to Commissioner Gordon's point that
the Board has already made all of these decisions. He said that there will be more robust bus
service as the additional funds come forward. He suggested that these concerns be made
known to Triangle Transit. He said that the light rail system will particularly serve workers. He
said that he does not believe Triangle Transit has been forthcoming about implementing park
and ride lots in Cedar Grove, Buckhorn, and the Eno EDD. These things are planned. He said
that everything they do is not a quid pro quo and is not always based on where we live. He
said that it is a group effort.
Chair Jacobs said that he would suggest that the Board look at the second page of the
abstract and the first decision is approving the '/2-cent transit tax; the second decision would be
the $7 vehicle registration fee, which has two options and Commissioner Gordon made a
motion regarding which option to use; and the third decision would be the $3 Triangle Transit
vehicle registration tax.
Commissioner McKee agreed with Commissioner Rich that the future is now. He said
that approximately 30,000 people in Orange County said `no' to the '/2-cent sales tax. He
made reference to the $7 vehicle registration fee and said that he is not aware of any other fee
where people without access to cars will have to pay a fee for a service that will be provided
free to other citizens. For this reason, he cannot support the $7 registration fee because it is
fundamentally unfair.
A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
approve the resolution regarding the '/2-cent transit tax, which will allow TTA to levy the tax
pursuant to its statutory authority. This resolution is necessary because TTA previously
entered into a "Do Not Levy" agreement with Orange County in which TTA agreed not to levy
the tax until requested to do so via a resolution by Orange County.
Res. 2012-112
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
RESEARCH TRIANGLE REGIONAL PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY TO LEVY
THE ONE HALF CENT
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION TAX APPROVED BY THE VOTERS OF ORANGE
COUNTY
WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners has adopted the Orange County Bus
and Rail Investment Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Orange County Bus and Rail Investment Plan provides for the levy and
disbursement of the one half cent ('/2 ¢) public transportation tax authorized by North Carolina
General Statute Chapter 105, Article 43; and
WHEREAS, in June 2012 the Orange County Board of Commissioners entered into an
agreement with the Research Triangle Regional Public Transportation Authority providing that
in the event the tax referendum was successful the Research Triangle Regional Public
Transportation Authority would not levy the one half cent ('/2 ¢) public transportation tax until
requested to do so by a resolution of the Orange County Board of Commissioners; and
WHEREAS, on November 6, 2012 the voters of Orange County approved via referendum the
levy of the one half cent ('/2 ¢) transportation tax.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Orange County Board of Commissioners
hereby authorizes the Research Triangle Regional Public Transportation Authority to levy the
one half cent ('/2 ¢) public transportation tax approved by the voters of Orange County.
This the 11 th day of December 2012.
VOTE: Ayes, 5; No, 1 (Commissioner McKee)
A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
approve the resolution levying the $7 new vehicle registration tax.
Res. 2012-113
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS RESOLUTION LEVYING A SEVEN
DOLLAR ($7.00) VEHICLE REGISTRATION TAX ON MOTOR VEHICLES REGISTERED IN
ORANGE COUNTY
WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners has adopted the Orange County Bus
and Rail Investment Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Orange County Bus and Rail Investment Plan provides for the levy and
disbursement of the seven dollar ($7.00) motor vehicle registration tax authorized by North
Carolina General Statute §105-570; and
WHEREAS, Orange County and one or more municipal corporations in Orange County
operate public transportation systems.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Orange County Board of Commissioners
hereby levies the seven dollar ($7.00) motor vehicle registration tax as authorized by North
Carolina General Statute §105-570 with said motor vehicle registration tax being effective July
1, 2013.
This the 11 th day of December 2012.
A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin seconded by Commissioner Rich to approve the
resolution "ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS RESOLUTION LEVYING A
SEVEN DOLLAR ($7.00) VEHICLE REGISTRATION TAX ON MOTOR VEHICLES
REGISTERED IN ORANGE COUNTY"
VOTE: Ayes, 4; Nays, 2 (Commissioner McKee and Commissioner Price)
Commissioner Gordon restated her previous motion about Option B:
Orange County creates an agreement with the NCDMV for direct disbursement of
revenues to TTA with similar reporting as noted above each November, and that this
agreement be for a period not longer than four years. The period of time would be coordinated
with the four-year review specified in the Implementation Agreement.
Commissioner McKee said that it makes better sense to have a method of
disbursement.
VOTE: Ayes, 5; No, 1 (Commissioner Price)
A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Dorosin to
approve the resolution authorizing the $3 additional TTA vehicle registration tax.
"ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
RESEARCH TRIANGLE REGIONAL PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY TO LEVY
THE FULL EIGHT DOLLAR ($8.00) VEHICLE REGISTRATION TAX ON MOTOR VEHICLES
REGISTERED IN ORANGE COUNTY"
VOTE: Ayes, 4; Nays, 2 (Commissioner McKee and Commissioner Price)
A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Dorosin to
request an annual update from TTA on the collection and disbursement of all taxes it is
authorized to administer for the OCBRIP and authorize the Chair to sign the three resolutions.
VOTE: Ayes, 6; Nays, 0
Chair Jacobs said that he hoped that Triangle Transit would follow up about
discussions about rural transit.
b. Proposed Grant Submittal to the North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) — Targeted Transit Assistance Program (TTAP)
The Board conducted a public hearing on a proposed grant submittal for North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) 5310 funds — Elderly Individuals and Individuals with
Disabilities Program — and considered authorizing the Chair to sign the grant application and
related certifications and assurances.
Department on Aging Director Janice Tyler introduced this item. This grant submittal
would address the need as identified in the 2012-17 Master Aging Plan (MAP):
MAP Objective 2.5: Orange County will encourage transportation services that enable
community mobility for older adults. Strategy 2.4.3 recommends that the Department on Aging
in collaboration with the Orange County Planning Department designate an aging-related
Mobility Manager to coordinate with other transportation providers to assist older adults across
Orange County.
The project is called STEAMM — Senior Transportation Expansion Access and Mobility
Management. The STEAMM project is proposed as a collaborative venture between the
Orange County Department on Aging, Orange County and Chapel Hill public transit systems
and various other non-profits and faith based organizations within the County and volunteers
who are willing to provide driving services to older adults. The total funding for the two-year
period from July 1, 2013 through June 30, 2015 for mobility management is $153,802. The
grant funding request to NCDOT for the two-year period would total $138,421 and the 10%
local match over the two-year period would be $15,381.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Alex Castro is a member of the Advisory Board on Aging and he said that he has talked
to people about the issue of transportation for the aging population. He said that he thinks that
there are people that are willing to help out but there is a lack of organization. He said that
there needs to be a mechanism in place to take advantage of the technology available to get
this project going. He recommends the County consider applying for this grant.
A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Price to
close the public hearing.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner McKee to
direct staff to develop the grant application and authorize the Chair to sign the grant
application and related certifications and assurances, once completed by staff, for submittal by
the December 28, 2012 deadline.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
7. Regular Agenda
a. Approval of Temporary Emergency Storm Debris Management Sites
The Board considered endorsing the designation and permitting for temporary
emergency storm debris management sites within the County as part of the Disaster Debris
Management Plan.
Solid Waste Director Gayle Wilson made a PowerPoint presentation.
Solid Waste staff has been working with Emergency Services staff for several months
in order to develop a comprehensive emergency debris management plan for the County. The
purpose of the plan is to be prepared to handle the quantities of debris produced by severe
storms such as an ice storm, major flood, hurricane, or tornado. In June of 2011 the BOCC
approved a contract with Neel-Schaffer to perform storm event operations monitoring and
reporting in order to properly document to FEMA so reimbursements can be maximized. Since
that time a Disaster Debris Management Plan has been drafted and is being finalized.
POTENTIAL EMERGENCY STORM DEBRIS MANAGEMENT AREAS
ORANGE COUNTY
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
IDENTIFIED POTENTIAL SITES
Eubanks Road (Existing site located at Landfill) - 4.9 Acres
Walnut Grove Church Road Convenience Center - 4.5 Acres
Future Northeast District Park - 39.6 Acres (North), 5.28 Acres (South)
Future Millhouse Road Park - 14.9 Acres
Eubanks Road (Landfill) - 4.9 Acres
Walnut Grove Church Road Convenience Center - 4.3 Acres
Future Northeast District Park— 39.6 Acres
North Side - 5.28 Acres
Future Millhouse Road Park - 14.9 Acres
Future Blackwood Farm Park - 12.4 Acres
Vincent Site - 4.4 Acres
Gayle Wilson said that staff is proposing that Site B — Future North East Park (Mincey
Road sector only ) and Site C — Future Millhouse Road Park as expanded — be authorized for
permitting as temporary storm debris management sites. These would be in addition to the
small existing permitted Eubanks Road landfill site.
Clarifying questions of the County Commissioners were answered by staff.
Commissioner Gordon said that she is concerned that two of these sites are parks and
that extensive clearing would have to be done.
Department of Environment, Agriculture, Parks and Recreation (DEAPR) Director Dave
Stancil said that on the Millhouse Road Park there is not a master plan or conceptual plan and
the proposed areas to be cleared are ones that would have been cleared eventually. On the
NE District Park, this area was identified as being used for something such as this along with
the park site.
Commissioner McKee said that the Millhouse site is two small tracts of three acres each
and these are not large areas. He said that it would be put back after it was used and he does
not have any problems with this. This is just planning ahead for something in the event of an
emergency.
Commissioner Price said that she was concerned about the conservation easement site
and she wants to respect the owner's wishes of not having any solid waste on the site.
Chair Jacobs said that the public should be confident that this would be done in the
most environmentally friendly manner.
Chair Jacobs said that the Board needs to start discussions about a conceptual plan for
the Millhouse Road Park.
A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to
1) Endorse Site B - Future Northeast District Park site (5.28 acres) and Site C — Future
Millhouse Road Park (expanded) site (approx. 14.9 acres) for inclusion in the Orange County
Emergency Management Plan as temporary emergency storm debris management sites and
authorize staff to proceed to obtain state permits for the sites; and 2) authorize the Manager to
inquire with the Triangle Land Conservancy (TLC) as to whether TLC would be amenable to
modifying the current conservation easement to allow use of the larger northern area of Site B
- Future Northeast District Park property as a temporary emergency storm debris management
site. These emergency sites would not be used longer than 6 months.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
b. Support for Hillsborough to Clayton Segment of the NC Mountains-to-Sea
Trail
The Board received an update on the progress of establishing a continuous section of
the NC Mountains-to-Sea State Trail from Hillsborough to Clayton (Wake County) and offered
guidance as desired.
DEAPR Director Dave Stancil said that this segment is from Hillsborough to the east.
He introduced Kate Dixon, Executive Director of the Friends of the Mountains to Sea Trail.
Kate Dixon, Executive Director of the Friends of the Mountains to Sea Trail, said that
this trail is part of the state parks system. She made reference to the maps at the County
Commissioners' places. She said that this is multi-governmental effort and it was proposed
years ago, but did not take off until about 10 years ago. She said that the green area is the
trail and the red on the map is where the trail is envisioned to go. She said that there is a lot of
progress being made on the trail in our area. When the trail comes together from Hillsborough
to Clayton there will be 150 miles of trail system. Hillsborough is working on a river walk, which
will also be part of the MTST. She made reference to the draft resolution and said that there
are gaps in the trail system within the Eno River State Park and this resolution is urging the N.
C. Division of State Parks to make closing these gaps a high priority. She introduced Robin
Jacobs of the Eno River Association.
Robin Jacobs said that the Eno River Association is excited about the MTST because
the association has been maintaining a lot of the trail within the park. She said that these gaps
in the trails within the park are a high priority. She said that it would help for the County
Commissioners to express support for this.
Commissioner McKee noted that the first page of the abstract that this action has
nothing to do with the planning corridor along the Bingham Township.
Commissioner Gordon asked what it would take to close the gaps.
Kate Dixon said that it would involve land acquisition and a road.
Commissioner Gordon noted that there is no financial impact associated with this item
for Orange County.
Commissioner McKee made reference to the sections of private landowners and asked
if there was intent to use imminent domain if negotiations break down and Kate Dixon said no.
RES-2012-115
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Resolution Urging the North Carolina Division of State Parks To Make Closing the
Mountains-to-Sea Trail Gaps Within the Eno River State Park One of its Highest Priorities
WHEREAS, North Carolina's Mountains-to-Sea Trail (MST) runs 1,000 miles from the Great
Smoky Mountains to the Outer Banks to showcase North Carolina's natural, rural and cultural
features; and
WHEREAS, the MST is a unit of the State Park System created and maintained in partnership
with local, state and federal governments and citizen groups; and
WHEREAS, the existing and planned route of the MST from the Town of Hillsborough east
follows the Eno River to Falls Lake and the Neuse River; and
WHEREAS, the MST will stretch continuously for 150 miles between the Town of Hillsborough
and the Town of Clayton when it is complete; and
WHEREAS, all of the land for the MST in Durham and Wake counties and in Clayton from the
Wake county line to Sam's Branch has been acquired and construction is expected to be
complete by the end of 2013; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Hillsborough and Classical American Homes are now building a
Riverwalk along the Eno River that is part of the MST; and
WHEREAS, the only missing links in the trail route between Clayton and Hillsborough are in
Orange County within the area identified for acquisition within the master plan for the Eno
River State Park; and
WHEREAS, Orange County is eager to see completion of a 150-mile continuous stretch of the
MST from Clayton to Hillsborough;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Commissioners of Orange County
urges the NC Division of State Parks to make closing the gaps within the trail in Eno River
State Park one of its highest priorities.
This the 11 th Day of December 2012.
A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
adopt the proposed resolution — Urging the North Carolina Division of State Parks to Make
Closing the Mountains-to-Sea Trail Gaps Within the Eno River State Park One of its Highest
Priorities.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
C. Approval of the Establishment of Three (3) New Fire Service Districts to
Improve Property Insurance Ratings and Lower Homeowners' Insurance Costs
The Board considered approving the establishment of three (3) new Fire Service
Districts to improve insurance rating, improve fire coverage, and lower insurance costs for
property owners outside of six (6) road miles from the nearest station in the existing Southern
Triangle Fire District.
Michael Talbert said that this is the next step from the November 13th meeting
regarding setting up a fire service district. Since November 13th, the Town of Chapel Hill has
met and directed staff to proceed. It will be back on the Town of Chapel Hill agenda in
January. The Town of Carrboro approved moving forward with modifying the existing fire
service district. The action tonight will lead to other actions. The North Chatham Fire
Department Board of Directors has to approve this, the State Fire Marshal's Office will have to
approve the maps, there will be a public hearing in January, and if everyone approves then it
will move forward.
Michael Talbert gave some background for the new County Commissioners. He made
reference to the maps and showed the old North Chatham fire district. For the South Orange
and the other districts, everyone's taxes will go up to make this happen. For North Chatham,
the rate will be 8.8 cents. For the Greater Chapel Hill district, there will be a tax rate of 10
cents.
The recommendation is to approve the establishment of the three new Fire Service
Districts and instruct staff to proceed with the additional steps needed to establish the three
new Fire Service Districts before July 1, 2013.
Frank Clifton said that the decision will depend on the Town of Chapel Hill if they agree
on the proposal.
Commissioner McKee said that the residents in this area will see no change in the
actual service provision.
Commissioner Rich asked why this would be approved without Chapel Hill's approval.
Michael Talbert said that there is only one meeting in January in order to have a public
hearing and execute this before February 1St
Commissioner McKee said that without all of the entities willing to participate, this plan
will fall apart. He said that there are not many other options available for the 112 homeowners
that are experiencing very high insurance rates and with the possibility of having no fire
insurance.
Chair Jacobs said that annexation will probably come up at the public hearing and the
County Attorney may need to report on the new changes to the annexation process.
Commissioner Gordon made reference to Attachments 6 and 12 and asked what parts
are being removed besides the area in yellow.
Commissioner McKee suggested looking at Attachment 9.
Michael Talbert pointed out these areas on the map. He said that if Chapel Hill says
that the 112 has to be annexed or they will not be serviced, then the plan falls apart.
Commissioner Gordon said that the approval should be of the intent to set up these
districts.
Michael Talbert said that the February 1 St deadline is from the state and if all falls apart,
they have new drafts of contracts to fall back on.
Michael Talbert said that the intent is to make the new fire insurance district for North
Chatham one in the same with the fire service district.
John Roberts said that the fire protection district does not go away. All this will do, if a
fire service district is created, is bypass the fire protection district. He said that the language
does not matter because the service district is not created until the Board of County
Commissioners adopts a resolution and holds a public hearing prior to the adoption of the
resolution.
A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner McKee to
adopt the Manager's recommendation to express its intent to establish three (3) new Fire
Service Districts and instruct staff to proceed with the additional steps needed to establish
these districts before July 1, 2013; without yet establishing these districts.
Commissioner Dorosin asked if the last clause was really needed, "without yet
establishing these districts."
Commissioner Gordon said that if it can be done this way, then it is fine. She agreed to
take out "without yet establishing these districts."
Commissioner McKee agreed.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
8. Reports-NONE
9. County Manager's Report
Frank Clifton said that the County's Social Services operates the Toy Chest this time of
year for families in need. He encouraged everyone to contact Social Services to help with this.
10. County Attorney's Report
John Roberts reminded everyone that Social Services also does the Toys for Tots
program.
11. Appointments
a. Orange County Commission for the Environment—Appointment
The Board considered making an appointment to the Orange County Commission for
the Environment.
A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Price to
appoint Mr. David Neal to the Orange County Commission for the Environment with a term
expiring December 31, 2015.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
b. Triangle Transit Special Tax Board —Appointments
The Board considered making appointments to the Triangle Transit Special Tax Board.
A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to
appoint Commissioner Pelissier to the Triangle Transit Special Tax Board.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner Price to
appoint Commissioner Gordon to the Triangle Transit Tax Board.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Discussion ensued as to whether or not Commissioner Pelissier could serve on this
board since she is already the Orange County representative to Triangle Transit. If for some
reason she could not serve, the Board, on a motion by Commissioner Rich, seconded by
Commissioner Dorosin, voted unanimously to appoint Commissioner Price to the Triangle
Transit Special Tax Board.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
The Clerk was asked to contact Triangle Transit for the eligibility requirements for this
board and to provide this information to the Board.
C. Designation of Voting Delegate for All NCACC and NACo Meetings for
Calendar Year December 1, 2012-2013
The Board considered making appointments for delegates to NCACC and NACo.
A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
nominate Commissioner Price as the Voting Delegate for All NCACC and NACo Meetings for
Calendar Year December 1, 2012-2013.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Chair Jacobs said that two Commissioners wanted to do this and two have agreed to
alternate years. Commissioner Price will do 2013 and Commissioner Rich will do 2014.
12. Board Comments (Three Minute Limit Per Commissioner)
Commissioner Gordon distributed a handout about an accident on Mt. Carmel Church
Road and Bennett Road. She made reference to the letter and said that the letter is urging
that something be done at this intersection because there have been multiple accidents there.
Commissioner Rich said that she followed up with Roger Stancil and what NCDOT will
be doing here. She said that NCDOT is scheduled to receive recommendations next month.
She suggested getting these recommendations.
Chair Jacobs made reference to the front page story in the Raleigh News and Observer
about a bridge in Orange County and NC 751 that has seen at least one fatal accident and
several other accidents since 2007. He suggested seeing where this stands in NCDOT
priorities.
Chair Jacobs said that by the time the County Commissioners can reconvene and hold
a public hearing to review the legislative agenda, the legislature will already be in session.
Clerk to the Board Donna Baker said that she heard from Representative Insko that for
governmental entities the deadline is March 3,d
Greg Wilder said that in past years the representatives have been appointed before the
holiday break.
A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Dorosin to
add this appointment to the agenda.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Chair Jacobs asked who would like to serve on the Legislative Issues Work Group and
Commissioner Dorosin volunteered.
A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Price to
nominate Commissioner McKee as the other legislative representative.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Chair Jacobs said that the County Commissioners received an email from Triangle J
Council of Governments regarding some issues about changing the way in which North
Carolina levies taxation.
Chair Jacobs said that the retreat committee met again and they hope to review the
notes to get to the Board by the end of the year.
Chair Jacobs said that they are hoping to reestablish the Chair/Vice-Chair/Manager to
meet with their counterparts, starting with Durham County, regarding proposed agenda items
for Board of County Commissioners to submit.
Chair Jacobs congratulated other retirees in the County - Charles Blackwood from the
Sheriff's Department and Tommy Jones from the Orange Grove Fire Department.
13. Information Items
• December 3, 2012 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions List
• Tax Collector's Report for Period Ending November 30, 2012
• Update on Outside Bookdrop at Orange County Library
• BOCC Chair Letter Regarding Request from Commissioner Earl McKee Suggesting the
Board Recognize Local Athletic Teams for Advancement in Recent Local/State/National
Championships
• BOCC Chair Letter Regarding Request from Commissioner Alice Gordon Suggesting the
Board Review/Revise the 2013 Meeting Calendar
14. Closed Session -NONE
15. Adjournment
A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to
adjourn the meeting at 10:17 PM.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Barry Jacobs, Chair
Donna S. Baker, CMC
Clerk to the Board